Skip to main content
9:00 pm
third story on my house and lastly if you go to object three the left side is built out in the back. it's the right side we're bringing out and look at the designs from the whole project there are six homes on the project. three are built out to that level already. mine would be the fourth and again for the bad faith and this action i think this has to be denied and the permit go forward. thank you very much. >> i have a question. you were slated to start construction december 1 but apparently you don't have the appropriate permits? >> can i get mr. lows? that's out of my expertise. that's my understanding. maybe i misunderstood. >> it was a long time -- at that time - - [inaudible] now i have more white hair than you. when
9:01 pm
we first get our site permit in november we can push for the addendum as fast as possible, but when the permit put there so we hold everything off. we have the addendum plan already. we scheduled meetings with the plan checker. we might not be done by december 1 but partially permit and the foundation and different work. in his mind that was starting construction. >> mr. wall, you indicated that the permits hasn't changed based upon the building department -- i'm sorry mr. wall. mr. sires, you know when i looked over that form i'm not sure it shows it
9:02 pm
never changed, but let me ask you the question. has your design change from what you presented at the 09-11? >> if you look at exhibit number five -- i'm sorry eight. it's the permit details report and it's from the planning or building department and has on there disposition stage and action date and stage so my understanding and mr. sanchez can correct me on this, so it lists all of the activity. triage and filing and this is when it was approved and no other action until -- >> i understand that but is it the same set of drawings there? you didn't replace the drawings at all? >> he can answer better than i can. >> scott sanchez planning department. the so the plans
9:03 pm
were most likely dated nine-four-09 and the plans by the sponsor is not the actual approved set but originally date of september 09 and the plans out to notification. there is in the upper right hand corner these are revisions and dated then and i'm assuming take into account the comments. the plans are not clearly highlighted to show if there were changes to the project. i would note that the elevator shown on the plans does not penetrate the roof. i'm not clear how it would function and no pit for hydraulic shaft or over head traction if it's that type of elevator. it doesn't penetrate the roof. it doesn't need that -- >> the new elevators are side mounted. you only need 6-inch -- >> that is fantastic.
9:04 pm
>> and doesn't need to go above the roof. >> that is good to know and even if they add the elevator after the 311 notification it wouldn't require a new one because there is no change in the envelope of the building. >> in the envelope. >> yes. >> thank you for the education on elevators. >> anything further mr. duffy? >> just the building department -- if we note exterior changes made we always write the plans back for review because they might need to do a separate 311 modified but at this point i don't know that happened or that it has but just to let you know if there are experior changes it has to go back to planning. >> but this went through a
9:05 pm
recheck. >> that's right. >> okay commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> commissioners. >> i guess the only concern they would have there are certain promises made to the neighbors. how do we enforce that? i don't think we have the jurisdiction to enforce that? >> especially when it acrosses different property lines. the only thing that we can do is condition the permit for the three items and it becomes a voluntarily effort by the permit holder. >> in the past at times the parties will reach a settlement and the board will condition the permit on the settlement that has been voluntarily entered into by the parties but the only issue is the permit holder's address there is no way to
9:06 pm
condition it construction happens at other places. they need separate permits for that work. >> so the site permit is really what is before us now. >> yeah. >> that's right and that's the only appealable permit. >> right. but could we continue that item and ask them to reach a settlement prior to that permit being upheld? >> i think that might be kind of tough. do we think they can -- >> if promises were made apparently and mutually understood. it's just they're not in writing as i gather. >> but if they're not -- >>i think they're two things here. one is obviously the permit holder wants to get going, and the neighbors want to see some level of documentation so they know exactly whether
9:07 pm
certain negotiations are still going to be upheld and we have the issue of once a sight permit is approved then cannot be appealed back to us, so -- >> sorry to interrupt, but when the building permits are issued they're separately appealable? >> no. only the site permit. >> got it. thank you. >> which is why the comment made earlier, the structural drawings come with the addendum and the framings drawings. do you only want to respond to this issue how to see if we have a middle ground here? >>i think we're in agreement with the three promises. if writing is what you want i am willing to sit down right now. it's on the record they said this and we're under oath. it's in my brief i'm going to do this thing and i think mr. brian can
9:08 pm
tell you written and oral contracts are the same in california and i am willing to put it in writing tonight if that's what you want. >> if he is agreeing to those terms -- >> under oath. >> under oath and thos. -- and stipulate to do the same. >> i promise to do that. >> commissioners. >> well, i think that we need to do what is within our jurisdiction which is to -- i am inclined to uphold the permit given there was no requirement -- that there was no expiration of the three 4re67b 11 notification and whatever disagreements there were about the promises made by the permit holder those are not within our jurisdiction
9:09 pm
although the permit holder has stated he is willing to make these stipulationos the record and that's completely voluntarily. i don't think we have the jurisdiction to impose that requirement, but if he is offering that in a neighbor leeway to. >> >> try to resolve the conflicts i am happy to hear the stipulation but i am inclined to up hold the permit at this point. >> i think we are trying to get some closure. i'm not sure we will get closure with all of the parties here but if we get some closure it's what we want to do. >> why do take a break and let them -- >> yeah, let's see if five minutes can do it. if not we may have to look at some other action. okay. >> and i would ask that the appellants come to the table in good faith as well as the permit
9:10 pm
holder and that we try to resolve this this evening. >> shall we come back at 915? >> 915. okay.
9:11 pm
9:12 pm
9:13 pm
9:14 pm
9:15 pm
9:16 pm
9:17 pm
9:18 pm
>> okay. we are returning to the january 9, 2013 meeting of the san francisco board of appeals returning to item nine. mr. sires. >> yes. pursuant to the recommendation i met with the parties and stating an agreement what i said i would do repair the retaining wall. >> he left. >> agreement that i signed and repair it and i would do that once construction starts. i met with mr. rogers and we exchanged phone numbers and emails. i wasn't aware and i don't have
9:19 pm
to do anything and i have to reimburse him and i will send him a check. i met with mr. wall and basically said it's not going to happen. >> and for the sky lights. >> that's the promise i made. you can't force me. i made the word and i'm going to put it in like i promised. >> if they allow you to. >> [inaudible] >> as councilmember hurtado said no reason to do it and nothing is blocked. >> i don't want to revisit the issue. the offer is out there. if you want to take it. >> (inaudible). >> the offer is out there that he pay for the sky light. all
9:20 pm
right. i think we should do the motion. >> i heard the offer. >> we are going to do that right now. >> and i'm sorry and another window blocked and he says i didn't agree to that. >> okay. i'm going to make a motion on this appeal. i am going to move that we deny the appeal on the basis that the 311 notice was not expired and that it was properly issued. >> madam director, if we want to codify this we should condition, shouldn't we? >> well, -- >> that voluntarily agreements
9:21 pm
between the parties which then means that you take the appeal and with hold the permits with conditions. >> i think my preference is they work it out on their own. >> i'm sorry. just the two options. >> i think i would like to proceed that way. >> okay. >> we have i motion then from commissioner hurtado to deny this appeal, up hold the permit on the basis that section 311 notice has not expired and was properly issued. >> and that the permit was pressurely issued; right? >> yes. >> not the 311. >> not the 311. 311 notice doesn't expire and this permit was properly issued. on that motion with that basis vice
9:22 pm
president fung. >> aye. >> president hwang is absent. commissioner. >> aye. >> commissioner. >> aye. >> thank you. the vote is four-zero. this permit is upheld on that basis. thank you. >> thank you everybody but before we leave commissioner lazarus would you like to say that we are adjourning in honor of one of our former members? >> thank you for reminding me. yes, i would. i would like to adjourn in memory of claire becher and served on this board and a number of city capacities during a career. she passed away during the holidays. >> and also director of this board. >> yes, that too. thank you. you appreciate worked with her. >> >> no, but i knew her and her x. >> thank you. so there is no
9:23 pm
other business this evening. >> we adjourn in honor of madam pilcher
9:24 pm
9:25 pm
9:26 pm
9:27 pm
9:28 pm
>> good afternoon, i am the chief building inspector with the department of building inspections brown bag lunch. we do this every third thursday of every month. this building behind me is one
9:29 pm
of san francisco's great landmarks, a designated landmark? >> it is on the national register list of historic buildings. >> with me i have a few guests, an old friend of mine and a partner who is a planner with the port of san francisco. welcome. thank you for coming along. and jane connors, who is the building manager. she will lead us on a walk through the building as we move along and talk about that as well. this is a fund and a unique place in san francisco, big, open space. a couple of times a week this is filled with a marketplace. >> 100 farmers. they are here on saturday. the farmers market is out front, anso

tv
[untitled]
January 9, 2013 9:00pm-9:30pm PST

TOPIC FREQUENCY San Francisco 4, Us 2, Hurtado 2, Scott Sanchez 1, Mr. Brian 1, Fung 1, Reminding Me 1, Mr. Duffy 1, Mr. Sanchez 1, Brown 1, Lazarus 1, California 1, Claire Becher 1, Jane Connors 1, Hwang 1, Mr. Rogers 1
Network SFGTV2
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 89 (615 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 544
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color